/ 






^^•^^^ 'V 



v^.^:^i^;^ -" 



V '*=.o-* ^^^ 



a^<b- 














"o. *rr^''' aO 





















s • 





















V , ' • o, o 






^ * 3 » •" 



?'•- ■** >* -ij^^A'. "-^^ ,^* •'? 



S 






J^S■ 












^bv" 






vV 



v^•n^ 



c 



,0- 






°' "c 






*bV^ 







V, 






■rf^ /v\ <^v, -^ .. ^ '^u .\y 







,^ ^,^>TrC. \ ^ 



■Jv-' . 













,% --^^ c- .^^^^U'. -o ./''.c;^%X'"' /^^J4:j.X 



.'^ 










THE KATs^SAS ISSUE. 



REMARKS 



OP 



HON. JAMES F. DOWDELL, 

OF A LABAM A, 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 10, 1858, 
Advocating the necessity of additional guarantees for the protection of southern rights. 



The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the 
state of the Union- 
Mr. DOWDELL said: 

Mr. Chairman: It is not my purpose to de- 
tain the committee at this time, by a considera- 
tion of all the points involved in the Kansas ques- 
tion. Under the rule, I will not have the time, 
did I so desire. But I do not desire it. The sub- 
ject has been freely and fully discussed for the 
last four years. The country is in possession of 
all the facts and all the arguments. It remains 
for us to pronounce the decision. What thejudg- 
ment of Congress will be, I knov/ not; but of its 
i-esults I propose to say a few words. Before pro- 
ceeding to speak, however,, upon this great and 
leading question, I will briefly allude to another 
subject which has occupied largely the public at- 
tention, and is intimately connected with the pub- 
lic interests. In some form its consideration wiH 
become, at an early day, the duty of the House. 
Not by any means underrating its importance, I 
simply allude to it for the purpose of protesting 
against an assumption of power of dangerous 
precedentexercised in thearrest of William Walk- 
er and hist olio we rs, by our naval forces, on foreign 
■soil. The act was in violation of laws, the strict 
observance of which is of the utmost importance 
to the peace of the country, and a regard for the 
rights of its citizens. It was the duty of the Ex- 
ecutive to enforce observance to the neutrality 
laws, to prevent illegal expeditions being fitted 
out and carried on against foreign nations, with 
whom we are at peace. No good citizen can com- 
plain of his discharge of this duty, whatever 
opinion may be entertained of the wisdom of those 
laws They do not, nor were they designed to, 
interfere with the right of an American citizen to 
expatriate himself — to emigrate with his arms in 
his hand. Even illegal expeditions, when within 
the jurisdiction of a foreign Governmental peace 
with us, are beyond the reach of this Govern- 
ment. The act of arrest was not only a " grave 
error," but the exercise of power unauthorized, 
and demanded signal rebuke. The purity of mo- 



tive, however itTlray palliate the offense of the in- 
dividual in the court of conscience, cannot cure 
the violation of law, restore the losses of the in- 
jured, nor avert the danger of the precedent. 

With these words I leave this subject for the 
present, and pass to another, more immediately 
demanding our attention, which I regard to be of 
the gravest character. No more important sub- 
ject can be presented for our action than the ad- 
mission of a sovereign State into our political 
Union. To the case now before us additional im- 
portance attaches, because of violent opposition, 
and the danger of results involving the peace of 
the country and the integrity of the Republic. 
States have been refused admission upon their first 
application. The postponement, although incon- 
venient, did not disturb the operations of the Gov- 
ernment, nor interrupt the harmony of our rela- 
tions. The cause of refusal was not violative of 
the spirit and fundamental condition of union. 
Therefore no serious consequences followed. The 
reason offered by the opposition for refusing to 
admit Kansas with the Lecompton constitution, 
strikes a blow at the rights of all the slaveholding 
States. Before venturing upon a decision of such 
momentous magnitude, it becomes us well to de- 
liberate. 

In the history of all Governments, no principle 
is better established than that a division of power 
is essential to the preservation of liberty. Political 
power, wherever located, under any form of gov- 
ernment, unrestrained, is despotic. It matters not 
whether lodged in the hands of one, a few, or 
many; only in the latter it is the more dangerous. 
A monarch, with a conscience to restrain him, 
might relent, hesitate, stop short of his victim; 
majorities never. Without souls or consciences, 
they would pursue their purposes and their 
victims to the bitter end. The founders of our 
system, v/ell understanding this truth, attempted 
to frame a government of divided power, wi th such 
checks, balances, and limitations, as would effect- 
ually guard the weaker against encroachment 
from the stronger, and forever prevent the concen- 
tration of power in any of its departments. 



For all the ordinary ends and purposes of so- I tory, or commiseration over defeat, cements more 
rieiy, this has been achieved. The system is found 'l closely the bonds of fellowship. The cry of the 
10 work admirably in practice. The three great old Shibboleth, with all its exciting associations 
departments of Government, the legislative, ex- j! in the past, will rally the clansmen long after the 
icutive, and judicial, have been kept distinct ar«3 I objects of combination have passed away. In 
independent. Neither House has infringed the ; this country numerous instances can be cited 
rights and privileges of the other. Nor has the i where political party feelings have proved supe- 
executive pov/er bten enlarged at the expense of '\ rior to the ties of personal friendship, and party 
the legisliuive or judicial. All this granted — the ;! animosities have destroyed kindred and church 
great departments are in the possession of all the j relations. Notwithstanding the strength and 
power bestov/ed on each by the Constitution — and stubbornness of this feeling, dividing and sway- 
further, that the Slates, in their separate jurisdic- 'j ing the masses of our countrymen, controlling the 
tions, hold their reserved rights and powers intact: I operation of the Government from the beginning, 
let me ask, of what benefit to public and private .1 who has not seen strong national parties go down 
liberty becomes our beautiful theory of a Confed- '' under the tread of sectional columns — bonds 
eracy, with its checks and balances between State i Etroneer than steel dissolve in the fires of sec- 



and Federal authority, the division of power be- 
tween the difterent departments of each, if, by a 
combination of States, all these departments of 
power, executive, legislative, and judicial, should 
pass into tl'.e hands of a majority, become united, 
and wielded in a line of policy hostile to the rights 
of the m.inority .' Of what avail, 1 repeat the ques- 
tion, with this state of facts, are paper constitu- 
tions to the ])rotection of the miiiority, however 
admirably they may be coiitaj^^ or stringently 
guarded, without power is cMBRled to negative 
aggressive ligislation .' Do notour systems of 
government, S:ale and Federal, with their multi- 
plied limitations upon power, demonstrate the aim 
■of our t'iUhers to have been to guard the rights of 
individuals and minorities against tiie tyranny of 
majorities.' And will not this design be totally 
thwarted, and our constitutional Government be 



tional strife .' But a few years ago the proud old 
Whig banner was triumphantly waving in a ma- 
jority of the Slates, and the gallant leaders, with 
a patriotism as broad as the Union, commanded 
the love of their followers and the admiration of 
their opponents. They have passed away. The 
banner no longer floats upon the breeze. The 
voice of the multitude hailing it v/ith loud acclaim 
is now hushed; no vestige remains. Not 
" 0:n' ro-i> of the wilderness left on its stalk. 
To mark where a garden had been." 

Sectionalism divided and conquered it. Such, 
too, was the fate of the American party. That 
organization, af'.er a feeble attempt at nationality, 
even with the strong declaration for " the main- 
tenance of the Union of these United States, as 
the paramount political good, or the primary ob- 
ject of patriotic desire," could not stem the waves 



esse?Uift% changed, by a permanent conibinalinn of'\ of sectionalism. It passed as a shadow— fled away 



a mnjoritij of Hie States witlt strengtii sufficient to 
hold and control all the powers of Fedeir.l legis- 
lation ? Most assuredly so. And especially is it 
true, when the ca\ise and continuance of such 
combination spring from hatred and hostility to an 
institution peculiar to the. minority. And it may 
be added, the more dangerous because of geo- 
grapiiical distinction. 

In this connectii.'i! the reply may be given, that 
the proposition is an impossibility under our ])res- 



as a vision of the night. There was left but one 
great political association, whose professions and 
policy looked to the interests of the whole coun- 
try — the last hope of the patriot. To its ranks 
were gathered the conservative of ail sections. 
Whigs and Americans, who sympathized with us 
in the conflict with sectionalism, to this national 
standard were rallic3. The battle was fought; we 
won the victory. Hope revived for a peaceful and 
glorious future to our country. Confidence in the 



ent form of government, because the Constitution etrength of the Government and the perpetuity of 
positively prohibits a Slate " to enter into any j our republican institutions was partially restored, 
agreement or compact with another State." Tiiis IIow long to last? E.-e the temporary fruits of 
is true, and yet my propositioi\.does not fail. No ^ victory are gathered, a cloud comes over us — the 
two or more States may formally enter into any ; shadows of death settle upon the path. The steps 
agreement or compact against another State; and ' of the de.'^lroycr are heard within our borders, and 
yet, through the agency of the Federal Govern- the spirit of dissension has fastened upon our 
ment,a m:\joniy of the Stiurs may effcclanllij com- | vitals. Shall the national Democracy fall a prey 
bine, hold possession of all the departments, and Ij to sectional jealousy.' Shall the glorious old party 
with the facility of construction common to ag- , of the Constitution, who, in peace and in war, 
cressors, torture the meaning, without altering a ■ have upheld the honor of the country and main- 
letter of the Constitution, so as to most grievously tained theprinciplesof republican liberty, godown 
oppress the minority. Tluis it will be seen how ' in the shock of battle ? Let this disaster overtake 
we may be oppressed, and how easily the spirit of us, let this evil day come, and it will be followed 
the original compact may be extinguished whilst by a long night of direful calamities. There will 
its beautiful body remains. The "next question be left, I doubt not, in every northern State, patri- 
is, will this dangerous combinalion be made? Are otic men, devotid and true to the Constitution — 
there any signs of such approaching madness? many who would willingly lay down their lives 
Air. Cliairman, we all know the power and in- for the constitutional rights of the South, I be- 
fluence of party associations. Those who march lieve. But, overshadowed and borne down by a 
under the same banner are always friends when sectional majority in every State, they would be 
an enemy is before them in the field; the stronger powerless for good. 

the antagonist, and the more desperate the en- ! Now, sir, under this state of facts, with the 
counter to be met, the stronger are the tiep of causes which have brought it to pass, let me ask, 
union, and the warmer the sympathies of friend- what security will the minority States have 
ship. After the battle, the common joy of vie- against oppression? If party cords, however 



3 



l>-^ stubborn and strong; the cohesive iron bands of 
,1^ common interest; the ties of kindred blood, ;ind 
'Ny^ personal friendship; the sacred and holy links of 
' brotherly love, hallowed by the strong memories 
■ of the glorious past; if these, if all these, cannot 
'■■* withstand the dissolving; fires of sectional hate, I 
-repeat the question, wliat securitjMs there against 
-^oppression ? Do you point me to the checks, bal- 
^ances, and limitations of our federative system? 
(O(to the constitutional declaration of rights, its defi- 
nitions and prohibitions of power? These, sir, 
would snap asunder like the green v/ithes wherein 
Samson was bound; "as a thread of lov/ is 
broken when it toucheth the fire." The power of 
construction could easily remove all these whole- 
some obstacles which fence the path of tyranny. 
They would bend to the desires of the majority, 
as the tall oaks to the sweep of the tempest. The 
history of nsankind, the world over, proves it. 
Collisions only can be avoided by effectual limit- 
ations to power. There must be a potent voice 
to say, " thus far shalt thou go, and no further;" 
or else, " the waves will roll not back." Hither- 
to our system of government has furnished that 
check, and our Constitution spoken that voice. 
Hitherto ol)cdience followed the command, and 
the " proud waves were staid." Did the spirit 
of the old Union live, liberty would live; State 
rights and private rights would be sacred, shielded 
against even the stealthy and insidious power of 
construction. But, sir, once let all the depart- 
ments of the Government pass into the hands of 
a combined majority section; and, whether the 
united powers would be used aggressively or not, 
the Constitution would immediately lose its vital- 
ity, the distinctive conservative feature of our 
system be destroyed, and the minority would be- 
come dependent upon the capricious will of the 
majority States. 

But suppose the majority, thus armed with 
power, disclaim all designs to injure — suppose 
them, for the time being, to be actuated by a love 
of justice: does this alter, in th.e least, the subject 
condition of the minority? To test the supposi- 
tion, let us say we believe your professions sin- 
cere; you intend us no harm; you have the power, 
but will refrain from its exercise to our injury; 
what objection have you then, in the absence of 
evil designs, to submit to wholesome restraints 
upon that power? If you never intend to exercise 
it oppressively, give us the evidence by laying a 
portion of it down. If you refuse, however sin- 
cere may be your professions, we are warned, by 
the history of the past, to be on ourguard. Equality 
between States, so essential to liberty, cannot long 
be maintained under an inequality between sec- 
tions or coinhinations of States, un\ess the stronger 
be circumscribed in their powers. The danger- 
ous state of ali'airs in which we find ourselves 
was clearly not contemplated by the fathers of 
the Repulilic, or else, with their intense opposition 
to centralized power, they would have guarded 
against it. The fears of our predecessors, soon 
after this Government went into operation, were 
aroused to this danger, and herculean efforts have 
been made to prevent disaster to the system by 
preserving equality between sections. The strug- 
gle has been a fierce one. With this view, for a 
long period, States have been admitted in pairs — 
a slaveholding and a non-slaveholding together. 
The equilibrium has thus been maintained up to 



a \'ery recent period. The admission of Califor- 
nia, in 1850, turned the scale against the South. 
Up to the time of that compromiae we v/ore safely 
guarded againstencroachments. The Senate stood 
like a mountain in the path of the aggressor. By 
the admission of California we lost the balance — 
both the grvjat legislative departments passed into 
the hands of the free States. 

Sir, holding this department of power, we could 
not, if we would, invade the rigl'.ts of the other 
section; but we could preventoncroachmentsupon 
our rights. That important negative )>ower, help- 
less to injure, mighty to protect, has been lost. 
We now stand relying for safety on national 
parties, and the love of justice which may remain 
in the bosoms of the majority. In ordinary times, 
these subordinate securities may prove beneficial; 
but we know they are as nothing in the path of 
avarice, ambition, and fanaticism. Parties are 
but the creatures of a day, the accidents of the 
hour. They are liable to change from constant 
occurring combinations, as new interests arise, or 
new whims are to be gratified. The lovers of justice 
havelieen too often driven bj' the wicked raultitude 
to " mountains ai^ deserts — to the dens and caves 
of the earth; ha^Been doomed to wandcraboutin 
sheep skins and^rot skins, destitute, afllicted, tor- 
mented" — for us torely solely upon this principle 
for protection. Something more than the mere 
love of justice in Governments, however civilized, 
is found necessary to prevent wrong. In framing 
the organic law, the people must be imbued with 
the wisdom and sense of right sufficiently great to 
part with a portion of their powers, and thereby 
extract the teeth and claws of the lion of authority; 
or else the weaker will, sooner or later, become a 
prey to the stronger. ¥/hatever be the form of 
the government, this evil tendency in man, to 
usurp and wield power, must be provided against 
to escape tyranny. 

If rsc -essity, then, be laid upon a people whose 
interests are identical, to bridle power to preserve 
freedom, how much more urgent the reason for 
restraints upon a Government whose authority 
extends over large Territories, holding dissimilar 
and often antagonistic interests? 

In thus contending, Mr. Chairman, for better 
safeguards to liberty than political jiarties can fur- 
nish, I do not mean to disparage the worth of the 
Democratic party. In all the sectional conflicts 
of the past, that party has given to the councils 
of the country m<«good and true, who have faith- 
fully stood by the constitution. My own section, 
demanding only her just and equal rights under 
that instrument, have found in that noble party a 
trusty and faithful ally. Hitherto it has deserved, 
in maintaining its integrity, the confidence be- 
stowed by the South. It is to be lamented that 
many have fallen in the battle; some have deserted 
the standard ; distinguished leaders have wandered 
off, and united their I'ortunes with the enelny; but 
the party still lives, and, I am proud to believe, 
holds in the North a host of patriots with hearts 
still true to the right. Unwilling to despair of 
the Republic, I must hope that the little band, 
though weakened by desertions and depressed by 
the diminution of confidence, will, with the daring 
courage of noble hearts, bravely face the storm. 
In time, they may gather the pure and the good, 
and rally strength to save the Constitution from 
the hand of the destroyer. Whatever be ourdes- 



tiny, the true men of the North will live long in 
the afft'clions of the generous and patriotic sons 
of the South. 

Mr. Chairman, I trust that I have shown to the 
committee the danger to our institutions of unre- 
strained majorities. I have not alluded to the in- 
creasing: hostility between the two sections, to be 
gathend from legislative resolves and acrimoni- 
ous articles in the public press, both religious and 
secular. The spirit of crimination and recrimin- 
ation prevails to an alarming extent. From this 
source reasons could be multiplied leading to the 
same conclusion. But none are so blind as not 
to see that perils environ our position of the grav- 
est character. With all my confidence in the 
Democratic party, and notwithstanding the hope 
expressed in its fidelity, I must still believe that 
some more ]>otent and enduring check is impera- 
tively demanded for our security against invasion. 
Upon this point, were any doubts left, my opin- 
ions would bf confirmed by the bold declarations 
of a northern Senator, who is regarded the head 
and front of the Black Republican party; one 
who speaks the sentiments and shadows forth the 
designs of that infatuated orga^iatiou. His phil- 
osophic eye discerns the con(|^H) of affairs and 
takes in the future. The boa!^Wf power which 
he makes discloses the dangers to which the mi- 
nority are exposed. In a recent debate on the 
Army bill, the Senator from Ne\y York [Mr. Sew- 
ard] said to tiie Senator from New Hampshire, 
[Mr. Hale:] 

" I am very sorry that the faith of the honorahle Senator 
from New Hampshire is less tlian my own. He appreiiends 
oonlintial (li>a>tcr. He wants this buttle contiuiu'd and 
fought liy skirmisli(;s, and to deprive tlie enemy of every 
kind of snpplies. Sir, I regard thU battle ai already fou«kt. 
It is over. All the mistake is that the lionorable Senator 
and others do not know it. IVc arc fi;;hting for a majority 
of free States. 'J'here are already sixteen to fifteen ; and 
wliatever the Administration may do — whatever anybody 
may do — before one year from this time we shall be nine- 
teen to fifteen." 

Mark well the language. These words were 
not delivered in haste. Coolly and deliberately 
uttered, they were the convictions of his judg- 
ment. I was in the Senate at the time, and heard 
them. To me it was a note of warning fi-om the 
enemy. '• We are fighting for a majority of free 
States;" "this battle is already fought;" "six- 
teen to fifteen;" and soon " nineteen to fifteen." 
If the rights of States and sections are to be re- 
spected, if the Constitution of the United States 
is to be regarded, let me ask the reason for the 
boast of a mnjority of free States. It is given in 
another speech of the Senator's. He said: 

'■ I expect to see this Union stand until there shall not he 
the footstep of a slave itnpressed upon the soil that it pro- 
tects, although thai soil will be extended, for aught I know, 
from the iVorlli Pole to tlie Caribbean sea, as it has already 
extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean." 

Whatever opinions others may entertain, there 
remains upon my mind not the shadow of a doubt 
as to the action of a party with such sentiments, 
when they shall be clothed with the power to le- 
gislate. They will, in a majority, wield powers 
destructive of our rights and property. If designs 
dangerous and despotic are not meditated, let me 
again ask why the exultation at the " majority 
of free States," coupled with the expectation of 
seeing " no footstep of a slave upon the soil" of 
the country ? And subsequently the same opin- 
ions were reiterated in a set speech by that Sen- 



ator. Sir, this spirit of aggression will not stop 
' at the seizure of all the common territory. Noth- 
ing short of universal dominion will satisfy its 
voracious appetite. The sight of ruined cities and 
desolated fields between the fanatic and his object 
will not arrest him in his wild career, nor curb 
the passion for conquest. 

By virtue of the Constitution, interpreted by 
the highest judicial authority, the southern States 
have the right to carry their slave property and 
plant their institutions upon the common territo- 
ries of the Union. This right must not be im- M 
paired, nor our progress and expansion impeded. I 
The law now in force allows it; stern necessity ■ 
in time will demand it; woe betide that people who 
shall, even under the forms of legislation, attempt 
to forbid its exercise. Sir, is there a man who 
doubts the attempt will be made, should the Black 
Republicans control iheGovernment ? Hatred to 
African slavery is their bond of union; its ulti- 
mate and entire suppression the corner-stone upon 
which they build. To this end, the declaration, 
" no more slaveholding States to be admitted into 
this Union." Not a Representative of that party 
would vote to admit a slaveholding Slate this day, 
however legal and regular her application. Were 
the slavery clause the only possible objection, it 
alone would be sufticient to control the action of 
their representatives in both branches of Congress. 
Thus stands the case now. The prospect of a 
change of opinion on the part of the represent- 
ative will at once vanish, when it is known that 
tiie constituency behind are far in advance of the 
delegate in hatred to our institutions. To their 
fixedness of purpose and bitterness of feeling, in- 
tensified by fanatic religious zeal, may be added 
the motives of imaginary spoils to be reaped in 
victory, and supposed immunity from harm to 
themselves in the conflict. Under those circum- 
stances, I must confess that I can imagine no 
probability of a change of opinion that will inure 
to the benefit of the South. 

The rapid growth of Abolitionism, its power to Bp 
dissolve national parties so unmistakably given, 9 
its present strength and bold attitude in Congress, * 
and its constantly augmenting power, should 
teach the minority section to look to remedies, in 
addition to national parlies, for their protection. 
The admission of Kansas, should she continue to 
be a slaveholding State, will not remedy the evil, 
nor materially aller the condition of'lhings. The 
j disparity between the two sections Will not be di- 
I minisiied. Oregon and Minnesota come imme- 
i diately after, if not before, to swell the major- 
ity of free States. Soon will follow Washington 
and Nebraska, Utah, and probably New Mexico. 
Willi tlusgreat probable preponderance of north- 
ern power, to be inflamed by the ruthless madness 
of a fiery fanaticism, to grow in its e.xcesses by 
each succeeding victory, what remedy short of a 
change in the organic law can be found equal to 
the emergency? What otiier plan to be devised 
which will lead to a peaceful solution of our dif- 
ficulties.' Sir, appeals to patriotism, invocations 
of right and justice, the recounted memories of a 
common struggle for liberty, will fail upon the 
dominant majority like the voice of flattery upon 
the " dull, cold ear of death." These will notdo; 
ihey are tcmiiorary expedients, vain and illusory. 
In the dark hour, party organizations, with pro- 
fessed devotion to national platforms, cannot 



5 



withstand the advance of sectional legions. With | 
a fell purpose to uproot and trample upon the old i 
landmarks of friendship, they come with the tread i 
of the Behemoth and the blast of the hurricane, li 
They propose by this interference with our do- h 
mestic institutions, through a sectional organ- ! 
izatio.i controlling the majority States, to pervert il 
our Constitution, one of whose main objects was 
" to insure domestic tranquillity, so as to inaugu- h 
raie domestic violence." I 

Sir, the great patriot statesman of the South, 
Calhoun, who, whilst living, had no superior, ' 
and dead, leaves not his like behind, has placed 
upon record, after a life of the largest experience, | 
the profound reflections of his matured judgment 
on this subject. He was devotedly attached to I 
the Union, and he endeavored most earnestly to 
impress upon the minds of his countrymen the i| 
means for its preservation. He said: ' ' 

"This spirit of fanaticism aims openly and directly at i 
destroying the existing relations between the races in the 
southern section ; on which depends its peace, pro^iperity, ■ 
and safety. To efiect this, exclusion from the Territories j 
is an important step; and hence the union between the i 
Abolitionists and the advocates of exclusion, to eliect ob- 
jects so intimately connected. All this has brought about 
a state of things hostile to the continuance of the Union, ' 
unless timely prevented." 

After speaking of the inadequacy of a restora- ; 
tion of the Federal character of the Government I 
to furnish a remedy, he continues: ! 

"The nature of the disease is such that nothing can reach 
it short of some oi-gaiiic change — a cliange whicli shall so 
modify the Constitution as to give the weaker section a 
negative on the action of the Government." 

Sir, the deliberate opinions of this profound 
thinker and wise statesman deserve something 
more than a passing thought. Every day since 
they were written their truth becomes more and 
more evident. A few more years in the same 
direction, and the " disease" of which bespeaks, 
" unless timely prevented," will result in death 
to the body politic. ' 

Mr. Chairman, although the admission of Kan- 
sas will not restore the equilibrium between sec- 
tions, as before stated, our right decision of the 
question is none the less important. Be the result 
what it may, the vote will teach a most useful 
lesson, and go far to establish the truth of the 
position which I have assumed. I will not now 
review the course of this and the previous Admin- 
istrations, or theiragents, subsequent to the organ- 
ization of this Territory, and preliminary to the 
formation of the constitution which is here pre- 
sented. Many things have been done which do 
not meet my approval, and yet there is much to 
deserve the approbation of the South. The main 
factthatboth the present Administration and its 
predecessor have unwaveringly supported the reg- 
ular authorities of the Territory, and promptly 
suppressed faction and rebellion — have interpreted 
the Kansas-Nebraska act to mean that no power 
less than the constitution-making power can per- 
manently fix and regulate their domestic relations, 
and thereby secured to the people of the South 
the right to carry and hold their property in the 
Territory — furnishes a good and sufficient reason 
for me to have given and to continue my support. 
Whilst, therefore, differing with the President in 
his reasoning upon the propriety and necessity of 
sUljmitting the constitution, or any part of it, to 
the masses for ratification or rejection, I cheer- 



fully accord to him patriotic motives, and fully 
concur in the conclusion at which he arrived. 
For the bold and manly tone of his last message, 
the just sentiments, the clear and unequivocal 
declarations of right, and the firm determination 
avowed to maintain the act of the Lecompton con- 
vention, he is justly entitled to the respect and 
gratitude of all good men in the Union. Did the 
same spirit animate the masses of our country- 
men, the same opinions of, and regard for, con- 
stitiitional law prevail throughout the North, the 
dangers to which I have adverted would be long 
postponed, if not entirely avoided. To accom- 
plish this desirable end , a rapid and radical change 
must take place in northern feeling and opinion. 

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New York, 
[Mr. Haskin,] who preceded me, is mistaken in 
stating that the State of Alabama has passed reso- 
lutions condemnatory of Mr. Buchanan. They 
justly condemned the course pursued by Gov- 
ernor Walker, but expressed confidence in the 
President. His position, in his late message, has 
vindicated the wisdom of that confidence. I am 
truly sorry, that the gentleman and his associate 
Democrats, who oppose the Lecompton constitu- 
tion, have place^hemselvcs in the category with 
Governor Wali|^, and have not verified a like 
confidence expressed in their behalf by many in 
the South. 

Kansas stands knocking at the door for admis- 
sion. Were her slaveholding policy fixed, her 
entrance would not restore political equality to 
the South. But this policy is by no means per- 
manent. Yet, because her constitution recognizes 
the right in her citizens to hold African slaves, so 
inimical is the feeling among northern Representa- 
tives to that institution, her admission is doubtful. 
This reason controls the entire Republican party. 
It is true, other grounds are also relied on; no 
one doubts, however, the chief objection with that 
party to be the slavery clause in her constitution. 
A part of the northern Democratic Representa- 
tives cooperate with the Republicans. They assert 
themselves to b« influenced by aiiotlier considera- 
tion; still they are found in aline with the enemy. 
In this crisis it is deeply to be regretted that all 
who do not make the slavery clause an objection 
[ are not found acting together. The question of 
submitting, by the convention, its work directly 
j to the vote of the masses, is one only of expe- 
diency, about which there may be legitimately 
I difference of opinion. Its decision belongs to the 
I people of the State, not to Congress. Our inquiry 
extends only to whether the constitution be the 
will of the people legally expressed; whether 
i there are in the State the requisite number of in- 
habitants, and whether the government is repub- 
I lican in form. The fact that a majority of the 
States admitted into the Union presented constitu- 
tions which had not been submitted to the vote of 
the masses, beyond all doubt settles the contro- 
versy that, with this question, we have nothing 
to do. To refuse a State ad mission for this cause 
— to require compliance with such a demand as a 
condition precedent to admission — would not be 
leaving them " free to act in their own way," but 
it would be the exercise of power not granted us 
by the Federal Constitution, and certainly in the 
very teeth of the act organizing the Territory. 

Doubtless some confusion has arisen, from a 
misapprehension in the public mind as to the 



n 



force of the term the people when used in a polit- 
ical sense. When it is declared to be the intent 
of the Kansas act " to leave the people thereof 
perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic 
institutions in their own way," does the term 
" people," here used, include all or a part of the 
inhabitants; those acting without legal form, or in 
accordance with law? Does leaving them "free 
to act in their own way" contemplate or warrant 
action in any si;iise, without legal forms? In. my 
opinion, clearly not. It has been asserted that the 
convention, although legally assembled, is not the 
master but the servant of the people. Reference to 
the Constitution of the United States, and many 
of the State constitutions, satisfies me that botli 
positions are false. A convention is neither the 
master nor tlie servant of the people. It is the po- 
tent voice of the people; or, to be more emphatic, 
it is, in the highest legal and constitutional sense, 
the people. " We, th&pcople, do ordain," is the 
language of the Federal Constitution, spoken by 
the Federal Convention which framed it. " We, 
the people, do ordain," is the language of some 
of the State conventions which ratified it. It was 
not submitted to the masses of the Union, for, 
constitutionally, there is no suApeople; nor was 
it submitted to the mas.?es of a^^one State. Yet 
the people both ordained and ratified it. What 
people? A representative people, a people in the 
republican sense of the term. Such is likewise 
the fact in regard to many of the State constitu- 
tions. The same term is used, " we, the people 
of the State, do ordain, "and yet the constitutions 
adopted were not submitted to popular suffrage. 
Conventions assembled in accordance with law, 
are the people in an organised capacity. Now, shall 
we presume to violate the sovereignty of a State, 
by polling her masses to ascertain whether the 
voice spoken by her convention is the truly ex- 
pressed will of the people? To do so, would be 
to exercise arbitrary power. 

The people of Kansas have, in accordance with 
authorities duly constituted by Congress in the 
organic act, in accordance with the laws of her 
government, in conformity to the requirements 
of the Federal Constitution, in a line with numer- 
ous precedents of States of the Union, adopted for 
themselves, in their own way, a constitution re- 
publican in form. Shall we admit or reject her? 
In my humble judgment there is not the shadow 
of a sound reason for refusal. The Lecompton 
convention was a political body, duly invested 
with power to make and ordain a constitution. 
The discretion to refer its work back to the masses 
belonged to it exclusively. They saw proper to 
submit the most material portion. All the bona 
fide inhabitants qualified to vote were invited to 
express their opinions by their votes. An elec- 
tion was held, of which due notice was given, and 
a large majority of those voting indorsed the por- 
tion submitted. Those who refused to vote, ac- 
cording to every sound principle of law, are pre- 
sumed to acquiesce — are bound by the decision. 
Otherwise, tliere is, through the ballot-box, no 
safety to constitutional liberty. To delay ad- 
mission, to require her to reconstruct her organic 
law, will be to countenance a rebellious spirit in 
her midst which has denied the authority of her 
government from the beginning. The dividing 
line in that Territory, truly says the President, is 
" between those who are loyal to this govern- 



I ment, and those who have endeavored to destroy 
I its existence by force and by usurpation." 
I The constitution presented is the expression 
I of the sovereign will of the people wlio acknowl- 
edge the authority of law. Those who voted 
against it, under an unconstitutional act of the 
Stanton Legislature,' were composed mostly of 
those who have uniformly resisted regular author- 
ity. To admit is to regard the will of the loyal 
and law-abiding; to reject will promote rebellion. 
] If the Stanton Legislature had the legal right to 
; alter the requirements of the convention, it had the 
I power to repeal the constitution. The assump- 
tion of such a right reverses the whole theory of 
our Government. Its action, under the circum- 
stances, was of no more authority than any other 
p«aceable assemblage of citizens; and the voice 
of the people evoked cannot be regarded, because 
they speak only through legal channels. 

There is a manifest tendency in the public mind 
to revolutionary ideas and doctrines. This grow- 
ing impatience oC legal and constitutional re- 
straints — tile thirst for something new and start- 
ling — is an evil omen of the times. The rapid 
progress of the spirit of change will, ere long, 
unless counteracted, place our dearest rights at the 
mercy of uncontrolled numerical majorities. The 
prevalent idea that a mere majority can, at will, 
assemble and change the organic law of a State, 
and that no legitimate restraints can be imposed 
upon their action, is at war with old republican 
ideas, and will lead to popular despotism. An- 
other distinguished son of South Carolina, Hugh 
S. Legare, now no more, on this point has most 
eloquently said: 

" The rcslnitnts which inodorn society lia.s imposed upon 
itself in the cxerci>ic ol" its sovereignty am chiIv an acknowl- 
edgment of tile fallibiliiy of man. In our own republican 
iii.siitutions thi.s self diuiial lius always struck nie as some- 
thing suhlime. All ab-ohne pnwi-r, if allowi'd to act on 
sudden impulses, will and must be tyrannical ; nor does it 
signify in the least by what name it is calleil, except, per- 
haps, that the galling severity of the bondage is in proportion 
to the number of masters. In the true spirit of Christian 
humilUy, the most sublime of all virtues, the people have 
taken care that they shall not be led into temptation by that 
omnipotence which God alone may not abuse, and reserv- 
ing to themselves ultimately an absolute control over their 
own destinies, have practically restrained the exercise of 
their sovereignly, by withholding from their agents some of 
its highest attributes." 

Sir, I will not deny to the people their right, 
when assembled in their sovereign capacity, to 
modify and change their form of government. 
This right, asserted in the Declaration of Independ- 
ence, was stationed outside of constitutions as an 
additional guard to the liberty, safety, and happi- 
ness of the people. Hut as " all changes in the fun- 
damental laws of a State, ought to be the work of 
time, ample discussion, and reflection," it would 
be much safer to confine its exercise within the 
forms prescribed by the Constitution. For a gov- 
ernment of a State to call into action the sover- 
eign power, on ordinary occasions, contrary to a 
prescribed rule by the people, to say the least, is 
inexpedient. Such a procedure, in my judgment, 
can only be justified by the highest public neces- 
sity. I know that this responsibility has been 
assumed by some of the Slate governnK^nts, and 
in this maimer New York, Indiana, Maryland, 
and others, have amended their constitutions, and 
no immediate evil results have followed. 

But the fact that in all the State constitutioVis 
suards have been thrown around the amending 



Eowpr, requiring concurring votes of successive 
legislatures, and in many cases a majority of two 
thirds, and thereafter a ratification by the quali- 
fied electors, shows the opinion of the people to 
be adverse to sudden alterations, and that danger 
was to be apprehended at this point. Mr. Chair- 
man, in this age, the danger to liberty is not in 
hampering majorities, but the opposite; not in 
restraining public opinion, but in giving a loose 
rein to its ebulitions and excesses. Sir, majorities 
can always take care of themselves; Init private 
interests and minority rights appeal to limitations 
and restrictions upon power to protect them. The 
more tardy the process, the tnore cumbrous the 
machinery in effecting a change of the fundament- 
al law, the greater the security to the citizen. 

Objection is made by some to the admission of 
Kansas, because, in the schedule attached to her 
constitution, the Legislature is not authorized to 
call a convention forpurposes of amendment until 
after the year 1864. Now, sir, whatever may be 
our individual opinions as to the wisdom and pro- 
priety of this provision, I huinbly submit that 
Congress has nothing to do with this question — 
it belongs exclusively to the people of that State. 
But do those who object, remember that Indiana 
was admitted with a similar clausd in her consti- 
tution, only the time-interdicting amendment v/as 
twelve years — ^just double .that of Kansas. Who '' 
objected to her admission upon this ground ! She 
was a free State. No one in the North, so far as 
I know, cared about the limitations which she im- 
posed upon her gdvernment. But ihn force in the 
objection, in the present case, may be found in 
the fact that Kansas is a slaveholding State. In- 
diana, notwithstanding the limitation, changed 
herconstilution before the time fixed had expired. 
Kansas, if she so desires, can do the same thing. 
I do not say that it will be wise in her people to 
do so. I believe it imprudent for any State to act 
differently from the forms prescribed in her con- 
stitution. But what is my opinion; what the 
opinions of all the members of this House .' Has 
not a State the power to pursue her own policy; 
to carry out the wishes of her people " in her own 
way?" This clause in the constitution of Kan- 
sas does not change its republican form. We 
are not permitted to look for any other objec- 
tion. 

Mr. Chairman, the State of Alabama, whose 
people I have the honor in part to represent, by 
the unanimous voice of her Legislature has, in 
the event of the rejection of Kansas, authorized 
a convention to be called to determine her' course 
of action. Taking her position by the side of the 



State of Georgia, " she will and ought to resist, 
even (as a last resort) to a disruption of every tie 
which binds her to the Union, any action of Con- 
gress upon the subject of slavery in the District 
of Columbia, or in places subject to the jurisdic- 
tion of Congress, incompatible with the safety, 
domestic tranquillity, the rights and honor of the 
slave-holding States; or any act regulating the 
slave trade between the slave-holding States; or 
any refusal to admit as a State any Territory here- 
after applying, because of the existence of slavery 
therein; or any act prohibiting the introduction of 
slavery into the Territories of Utah or New Mex- 
ico; or any act repealing or materially modifying 
the lav^s now in force for the recovery of fugitive 
slaves." Sir, to her I owe my allegiance. What- 
ever course she may in her wisdom pursue, as 
one of her sons, bound to her by every tie, in weal 
or in woe, I shall cling to her fortunes. 

I will not disguise m)' feelings on this question. 
It is indeed painful to me to contemplate the ne- 
cessiiyWid upon my State to invoke her sovereign 
power to resist aggression. Believing, as 1 sol- 
emnly do, unless some constitutional check be 
placed upon northern power — increasing daily in 
numbers, and in Anaticism — the minority States 
will be, at all timgs, liable to oppression, I heart- 
ily concur in the resolutions adopted by her Le- 
gislature. The time for action is at hand. Did I 
not warn my people of the dangers which threaten 
the overtlirow of their rights, I should not be a 
faithful sentinel. That the deliberations of her 
convention when called, may result in some plan 
furnishing additional safeguards to liberty — pro- 
tecting the rights of the South, without severing 
the bonds which unite the States, is my most 
earnest c£|S4re. To this end, limitations upon the< 
powers oW?lie combined majority section are abso- 
lutely indispensable. Those who profess to love 
tiie Union " may cry peace, "at the passage of this 
or that measure, " but there will be no peace;" 
there will be, if I rightly comprehend the strength 
and designs of the Black Republicans, no cessa- 
tion of hostilities; no pause in the march of ag- 
gression; no security for our rights, nor safety 
to the country, until this end be attained. The 
responsibility rests upon the majority section. 
Consenting to this necessary check upon their 
powers, they can restore harmony between the 
two sections — they can dry up the bitter waters 
of strife. Otherwise these dark waters will flow on 
until all the feelings of friendship are poisoned; 
all motives to union destroyed; and all the bless- 
ings that we no%v enjoy in common so richly, for- 
ever eng-ulfed. 



Printed at tlie Congressional Globe Office. 



.1 



592 . 









.._*^ .-I^^V- %_. ^ .'>'•' 





















O * 5 . < 






/ V 










-^ - . . ^ .0 




V* s * * * ' c 



i'^A!" 0-, 






x^r^ 



(7> 



vO 



,^ . . . 




/:.:.: 


























0' 



> 



^/ ^M^, %.^ 



. -Jy^ , c « c , -V 



*-'^ 












^ ^^f^ 







^^^•^^ 
-^^ V 






•^ ' " A ' '^ a\ '^^ ' " -A 

- • ^^ .,. "V '"-* J> 



A?^ , o « c , 







i^S^ N. ll/lAIIILHli,ltH, i^^Rf/ ^"^ 

HB^ INDIANA J I'^C/A^* ^.^ 



